'Pam-A Roses & Lilies' pics in good quality are now available!!

truelighth

Green can be due to a darkened yellow (which can be tested in a good photo editing program by reducing the value/lightness/luminance of yellow), so if a scan appears lighter than the original, the greenishness due to a darkened yellow will diminish. This is a strange peculiarity of yellow, which probably has something to do with the sensitivity of our color vision to green wavelengths. Artists often take advantage of this by mixing yellow with black to produce dull olive greens.

Just to make it clear, it is the actual cards that are more greenish, not the scans! I can of course adjust that with something like adobe to match the actual cards. But I am wondering why the scans are less greenish then the actual cards.

As for the greenish hue on the cards, I think this is probably due to their age (and maybe quality of paper). The Pam-A crackled back has less greenish cards. But then again, the colours are different on that one compared to the R&L in intensity and saturation.
 

truelighth

This is really interesting. When the Centennial came out, people wondered about the color choices. Looks like US Games used the oldest known version as the model. :)

Hello Debra,

I immediately knew they had used the oldest known version, the Roses&Lilies as the model. But of course, I had the advantage that I knew what it looked like. Besides, Stuart Kaplan said he would reproduce the deck at the Chicago conference. And he does not own a regular Pam-A with the crackled back.

But it is a good thing that they modelled this one after the oldest Pam deck. And not some kind of weird combination of what they did with the original Rider Waite
 

Richard

Just to make it clear, it is the actual cards that are more greenish, not the scans! I can of course adjust that with something like adobe to match the actual cards. But I am wondering why the scans are less greenish then the actual cards......
It's hard to explain, but the greenish cast on a card, or painting, or whatever, may diminish in a scan if the scan appears lighter than the original. This effect applies to certain greens more than other colors, because the sensitivity of the cones in the eye to green varies, depending on the luminance/lightness of whatever it is looking at. If this isn't clear, don't worry about it.
 

OnePotato

Just to make it clear, it is the actual cards that are more greenish, not the scans! I can of course adjust that with something like adobe to match the actual cards. But I am wondering why the scans are less greenish then the actual cards.

As for the greenish hue on the cards, I think this is probably due to their age (and maybe quality of paper). The Pam-A crackled back has less greenish cards. But then again, the colours are different on that one compared to the R&L in intensity and saturation.

Hullo Truelighth.

Thanks again for posting the Rose & Lillies scans.

You are almost certainly correct, in that the paper on the R&L has browned/yellowed slightly, and shifted the color toward green. (Blues and cool greys will move toward green. Yellow and red may be less obviously affected, but may darken towards brown.) Because R&L is entirely different paper, the effect may be more pronounced than on the Pam-A crackle back, or other crackle back decks.

The scanner may enhance this effect.

The monitor is displaying the colors as red-green-blue. The inkjet process converts to cyan-magenta-yellow-black. Both also re-scale the image to the size of the display.

The inkjet printer, being based in cyan-magenta-yellow-black, will always have a harder time reproducing accurate greens, so there is built in software compensation at work.
It will have a subtle effect on both the screen display & the printer results.

Also the environmental lightsource that you use to look at the printed paper images will affect the appearance of the color. (This is called color temperature.)
Ordinary incandescent light will add warmth, (yellow/brown) and add to the effect of the yellowed paper.
Fluorescent light will give a cool, or sometimes greenish cast.
Daylight will give an accurate, neutral appearance. (Usually best to judge the color in daylight, or if possible, in the final target audience lighting.)
LED lighting sometimes tends toward a cool blue.

(Aside: They sell dual-bulb desk lamps that have both fluorescent and incandescent bulbs in them in order to better-approximate daylight color temperature.)

Color management should take the final display into account.
If you want optimum screen display, you must adjust for it.
If you want optimum paper print appearance, you must adjust for that.
There are software/hardware combinations that help with these calibration issues, but they are a specialty item, and not suitable for casual users.

The point is, a lot goes on.
(Even a lot more than I've mentioned here.)
 

Richard

When yellow is darkened it turns greenish. It doesn't matter if the darkening is done in RGB, CMYK, or with pigments (yellow+black). The attachments were done in CMYK space. The first image is pure Y. The second has a K component added, but no C or M. ETA. Let me emphasize that no green, blue , or cyan has been added to yellow to get the second image. It is just a darkened yellow. The apparent greenness is essentially an optical illusion due to the way your eyes and brain process yellow. Nor does it have anything to do with your computer monitor. The same phenomenon appears when yellow watercolor, oil paint, or ink is darkened by, for example, the addition of black.
 

Attachments

  • yellow.jpg
    yellow.jpg
    1.3 KB · Views: 282
  • yellow_black.jpg
    yellow_black.jpg
    1.3 KB · Views: 281

truelighth

Daylight will give an accurate, neutral appearance. (Usually best to judge the color in daylight, or if possible, in the final target audience lighting.)

Thanks for the explanation :). I knew there were differences.

That is why, when I did compare the colours on the print-outs, the screen and the auction cards, I did that during the day, using day light. I know things look different with the artificial light.
 

neogeo

Million thanks Kenji

At last, the eldest of PAM sisters is out...:)

By courtesy of truelighth, I have uploaded the pics of all the 78 cards of a 'Roses & Lilies' deck in her collection. So now all the five PAM sisters are shown in my place, which is my great honour.

http://blog.goo.ne.jp/valet_de_coupe/e/10b39ab41d023e6b44bb7d7b7209c772

They are 300dpi JPEG images, around 2.5 MB each.
I hope they will be helpful for sincere RWS students in the world, along with my pics of the other 4.

Again, I express my sincere gratitude for the kindness and generosity of truelighth!:D
 

truelighth

In view of the earlier discussions about the true colours of the scans and the cards, I want to point out a new page on World of Playing Cards:

http://www.wopc.co.uk/tarot/rider-waite/

I was asked to make a page about the early Rider Waite decks for the site and I did. So the scans and the text are mostly mine. When making the scans, I made sure that what you see on the screen, faithfully resembles the colours of the real cards. (In other words, I have tweaked them to make sure they look exactly like the cards. If you were to print those images, they probably look wrong. But on your screen, they look right).

But anyway, for anyone who wants to make a comparison and see the real colours of the cards (including the Roses&Lilies), check out the page :).
 

Abrac

Nice pics and nice article too. Thanks for the heads-up. :)
 

Tarotdivine

At last, the eldest of PAM sisters is out...:)

By courtesy of truelighth, I have uploaded the pics of all the 78 cards of a 'Roses & Lilies' deck in her collection. So now all the five PAM sisters are shown in my place, which is my great honour.

http://blog.goo.ne.jp/valet_de_coupe/e/10b39ab41d023e6b44bb7d7b7209c772

They are 300dpi JPEG images, around 2.5 MB each.
I hope they will be helpful for sincere RWS students in the world, along with my pics of the other 4.

Again, I express my sincere gratitude for the kindness and generosity of truelighth!:D

Thank u very much!!!